<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Nautilus memory use, part 2</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/2006/04/18/nautilus-memory-use-part-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/2006/04/18/nautilus-memory-use-part-2/</link>
	<description>Cool links and commentary</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2009 16:29:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Thomas Thurman</title>
		<link>http://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/2006/04/18/nautilus-memory-use-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-110</link>
		<dc:creator>Thomas Thurman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/2006/04/18/nautilus-memory-use-part-2/#comment-110</guid>
		<description>You rock!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You rock!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frank</title>
		<link>http://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/2006/04/18/nautilus-memory-use-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-111</link>
		<dc:creator>Frank</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/2006/04/18/nautilus-memory-use-part-2/#comment-111</guid>
		<description>Good job man, this is what we need, a polished and lite desktop :D</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good job man, this is what we need, a polished and lite desktop <img src='http://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/wp-content/mu-plugins/tango-smilies/tango/face-smile-big.png' alt=':D' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/2006/04/18/nautilus-memory-use-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-112</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/2006/04/18/nautilus-memory-use-part-2/#comment-112</guid>
		<description>Dunno...I&#039;d prefer a higher memory use if that means that the icon cache has to be rebuilt if I restore a nautilus window that wasn&#039;t active a long time (which means a noticable lag I guess).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dunno&#8230;I&#8217;d prefer a higher memory use if that means that the icon cache has to be rebuilt if I restore a nautilus window that wasn&#8217;t active a long time (which means a noticable lag I guess).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alexander Larsson</title>
		<link>http://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/2006/04/18/nautilus-memory-use-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-113</link>
		<dc:creator>Alexander Larsson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/2006/04/18/nautilus-memory-use-part-2/#comment-113</guid>
		<description>Windows are open don&#039;t loose their icons from the cache, independently of how long since they were active, because they reference the pixbuf themselves. This only affects pure cached not-in-use icons.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Windows are open don&#8217;t loose their icons from the cache, independently of how long since they were active, because they reference the pixbuf themselves. This only affects pure cached not-in-use icons.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ashley Hooper</title>
		<link>http://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/2006/04/18/nautilus-memory-use-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-114</link>
		<dc:creator>Ashley Hooper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/2006/04/18/nautilus-memory-use-part-2/#comment-114</guid>
		<description>Thanks so much Alexander!  At present I run Enlightenment 16 (with GTK apps) as my computer is not able to run a modern Gnome with reasonable performance.  However I would like to run Gnome again in the future - memory use and unnecessary I/O are the clinchers for me.  I am following the progress of the optimisation work that yourself, Federico and others are doing with great interest!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks so much Alexander!  At present I run Enlightenment 16 (with GTK apps) as my computer is not able to run a modern Gnome with reasonable performance.  However I would like to run Gnome again in the future &#8211; memory use and unnecessary I/O are the clinchers for me.  I am following the progress of the optimisation work that yourself, Federico and others are doing with great interest!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
